Ka

[Letti]

Of course, and it is my answer to everything.

That's easy.

[LadyHitchhiker]

I agree with Spencer

[Storyslinger]

Of course, and it is my answer to everything.

That's easy.

[Letti]

Of course, and it is my answer to everything.

That's easy.

[Matt]

i wish free will existed but since God has created all things he knows all things meaning knowing what we are going to do, destroying the fact we dont have control so yes Ka is Fate in Roland's world which mean it is true

I agree that Ka is basically "fate" but you lost me with the God thing.

[Malficeus]

i wish free will existed but since God has created all things he knows all things meaning knowing what we are going to do, destroying the fact we dont have control so yes Ka is Fate in Roland's world which mean it is true

I agree that Ka is basically "fate" but you lost me with the God thing.

lol i awlays do with anybody just see it as over thinking. As for the God thing look at it as a perfect working rube goldberg device.. he created it and knows when it working what it is going to do exactly, thats what my point i was trying to get out

[Brice]

i wish free will existed but since God has created all things he knows all things meaning knowing what we are going to do, destroying the fact we dont have control so yes Ka is Fate in Roland's world which mean it is true

I agree that Ka is basically "fate" but you lost me with the God thing.

lol i awlays do with anybody just see it as over thinking. As for the God thing look at it as a perfect working rube goldberg device.. he created it and knows when it working what it is going to do exactly, thats what my point i was trying to get out

I'm not religious at all, but the two concepts are not mutually exclusive. They can both simultaneously be true. You can have the free will to choose and a god can know what you're choices will be without impacting upon or interfering with them.

And yes, I think fate is a part of what ka is.

[John_and_Yoko]

Didn't used to believe in what The Dark Tower series calls "ka" (and which term didn't even originate therein), but now I'm changing that belief.

I think of it as like a law of physics--like water running downhill. Yeah, it may make twists and turns along the way, but it always runs downhill eventually.

Likewise, you have free will, and you can deviate from the "path" to whatever degree, but eventually you do get drawn back to it.

And I can vouch for that--not least of which is my being "drawn" to The Dark Tower series, which is fast becoming one of my favorite stories ever (not to say my most favorite). I've had opportunities in the past but turned them down, but finally I've made it. And I'm glad.

[pathoftheturtle]

...The only point was that everyone who has professed belief in Ka here doesn't really seem to mean Ka as described in the book. Ka of the book is a complex concept that includes lots of aspects. Taking one and ignoring others seems to me inconsistent. For example, most of discussion is not about Ka as a whole, it is about the existence and role of free will. ...

Absolutely. The single question of this thread is inadequate to all of the connected issues that stand around those various aspects. One of several other threads which we should have here is one, for example, specifically dedicated to asking about the relationship between ka and Gan.

...2. I like ka. I like the idea that "what will be, will be".
<...>
3. Ah hell, maybe I am talking in circles. But, if ka is a wheel, that makes sense, too, I guess.

...
2. Why do you insist on calling it ka? There are more interpretations to the idea, and there is more than that to the concept of ka (itself hardly consistent, by the way)

3. And here comes an interruption of logic. You like the idea (see above), and you call it ka; but since ka is like a wheel, you are ready to accept the idea of the wheel in your reality. Why? How does it logically follow from "what will be, will be"? How does it tie in with the rest of your picture of the world? What are your foundations for your beliefs? Do you believe in wheel only because a writer happened to cover it with the same conceptual blanket as "what will be, will be" idea?

...I think things do move in a circle. We're born, we die, another is born, etc. What goes around comes around. The energy you put out, positive or negative, comes back to you. ...

So, in fact that was not a direct chain, but an example of independent events from common causes. Daghain didn't accept the wheel idea into her reality because King suggested a connection; rather, she accepted his suggestion because she already had in her reality the belief which King was writing about.

...

Here's a question... do you think Stephen King believes in "Ka"?

I don't.

What I think is that Ka is one of the many beliefs existing in Roland's world, akin to citizens of Lud's belief in demons inside the drums, and as deadly as that. I think when that belief became predominant, it may even have led to the world moving on... although I got to give it more thought. The whole saga for me is about Roland overcoming his false beliefs, fighting the fascination of Ka, and finally learning to exercise his free will, thus eventually becoming free.

...Weather he believes in Ka, I am not sure but I am convinced that he does believe in the multi-verse

I think the same, although I am pretty sure he doesn't believe in Ka. Multiverse is, however, an entirely different kettle of fish... I am inclined to rather like the idea of a universe organized in such a complex way. Luckily, the two concepts are mutually independent.

It's ironic here that I happen to think that King was actually mostly criticizing the multiverse as portrayed by other writers, because I disagree unreservedly with Jean's interpretation of ka as a fiction within the fiction. I'm not sure, either, whether King really believes in ka, but what I have to say is clear is that he meant it as truth within the novels.


Now, then, to turn to what is literally, if not yet authentically, on topic here. Do I really believe in ka?
Yes, I think so.
I believe in destiny, sure, although that is not necessarily the same as believing in determinism (in any of its recorded forms) or believing in fate. It is important to know that, as Jean pointed out, all of these ideas actually have their own established definitions.
Like Daghain, I, too, do believe that the wheel is in reality. I can't deny it, although, if that is ka, then I most certainly do hope that it is possible to be "above ka."
I believe that powers beyond my control, which I cannot define, are doing things which I don't understand. I don't know how they'll affect me, or when that might occur, but I do my best.
So tell me, if you want to try to sort out what was and was not said in TDT, what else than this does "ka" mean?

[flaggwalkstheline]

One thing I took out of the dark tower is that because

Spoiler:

roland is reliving his journey

albeit slightly different each time from the previous time, then ka is preordained for him because everything he does has already happened, except that ka shifts just a little each time, so in his case its not quite what lost fanatics refer to as "Whatever happened happened" but its close

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I voted "yes", but with a caveat. I do believe that individuals are born with innate abilities and disabilities that would lend certain tendencies to their destiny. However, I feel that, for better or worse, your destiny is earned by your actions. I don't believe in absolute, inescapable "Ka" by any means, but I do feel like certain attributes would make one path more or less likely.

[pathoftheturtle]

flaggwalkstheline: An excellent point, which shows that the ideas of ka and alternate realities may not be so unrelated after all. A multiverse in which every possibility occurs is one in which nothing is ordained, because everything is. To define a thing is to take away what is not that.

But listen... if everything goes the same direction... and most of the things or all of the thing must happen, why is it important in your view how I live?
...
If everything goes the same direction and life is like a nice clock... as I see it reponsibility... gets very little.
Do you see what I don't understand?

Indeed. Do you see how indeterminacy turns out to have the same problem? If I know that, if I do not do my duty today, there will still be a universe where I do, then why should I bother? Plus, if I know that, if I do do my duty today, there will still be a universe where I do not, then, again, why should I bother?
The question of responsibility is "What difference does it make?" If the existence of every option is ka, then I don't see how anything can be making any, really.

BROWNINGS CHILDE: You are talking about the difference between determinism, which says that all events result from causes, and fatalism, which says that no causes can alter events. You're also saying that there is free will, and questioning its limits. You may be right that those limits are related to ka, but I think that it'll be less confusing to phrase as a question, "Is ka inescapable fate?" than to state that you "don't believe in absolute ka."

I do believe in Ka. Fate. Destiny. Even if it's affected by my free choices, it's a collision with someone elses free choices. I am responsible for how I live my life, but something else (surely not me) is responsible for those obsticles/people that are put in my path.

Ka.

And, if I'm wrong, I'll never know it!

I see what you say but isn't it a paradox?

Not to me, I believe you can have free will within destiny.

For instance, when we shop, the kids can get whatever they want from this rack

freedom to choose, within boundries

The first time that I ever heard the phrase "free will," I took it as a contradiction in terms. The "will" tries to control. So long as people use their wills, there cannot be freedom. The paradox would be in saying that I can make free choices for myself without affecting others. Either I can get what I want from them, or I cannot. Who decides? Or to put the same question into different words: What is destiny?

I think that Matt was on to something, there. Something like what B'sC was referring to.

I have a problem with the assertion that there is no ka, if that is intended to mean that free will should be absolute. The "Great Old Ones" were free, in that sense. They did not follow the way of duty, they did not fear any God... They respected no limits, and the Waste Lands were the result. Karma is the law of consequence. The boundaries, in that belief system, are the boundaries of natural law. You can drink all you want, but you're the one who'll have the hangover. Isn't that the way it should be? If we can "cure" all of that, change the laws of nature, so that we can do whatever we want, then don't we need to consider metaphysical questions? That is, are there any higher laws which say what will happen if the laws which have said what has been happening are changed, or laws which can show which of the alternatives to those simpler laws might be better used?

How can humanity limit humanity?

Jean: In saying that the moral of TDT is that the post-cataclysmic pagans have a bad system, weren't you ignoring that religious lesson in the books which King made the most explicit? --

'Salem's Lot, DT5, 6, & 7

Callahan had to learn to have a deeper faith; to know that the true God was not in his symbols or his own ideas.

In theory, Christianity means that the old self passes away, so that the Christian's aims are like God's, serving the entire universe instead of putting one person ahead of others. In practice, what often happens is that the same sinner goes on, imagining that God's aims are like his own, insisting others follow him along a road of good intentions.
Not to say that about you personally, my brother. Just trying to clarify the issues at stake in these discussions.

[Jean]

Jean: In saying that the moral of TDT is that the post-cataclysmic pagans have a bad system, weren't you ignoring that religious lesson in the books which King made the most explicit? --

Mike, sincerely, I don't see what made you think I ever said that. I am notorious for reading Christianity into every line of TDT (at which you have already gracefully hinted before ); I also said a few times that the system (social, political, or moral) of the post-cataclysmic pagans seems to me highly unacceptable, but I never reduced everything said in the book to this only point - if anything, I stretched the Christian message of the book beyond the limits of universal acceptability, to which I happily admit.

[pathoftheturtle]

I am notorious for reading Christianity into every line of TDT (at which you have already gracefully hinted before )

Are you calling me tactless?
Perhaps so, but no offense meant. I may also be just as guilty of reading Christianity into things, if not quite as notorious.
Anyroa', to rephrase, isn't much of this--

...What I think is that Ka is one of the many beliefs existing in Roland's world, akin to citizens of Lud's belief in demons inside the drums, and as deadly as that. I think when that belief became predominant, it may even have led to the world moving on... although I got to give it more thought. The whole saga for me is about Roland overcoming his false beliefs, fighting the fascination of Ka, and finally learning to exercise his free will, thus eventually becoming free.

--contradicted by the pere's discovery of "the ka of Mid-World"?

[flaggwalkstheline]

I am notorious for reading Christianity into every line of TDT (at which you have already gracefully hinted before )

Are you calling me tactless?
Perhaps so, but no offense meant. I may also be just as guilty of reading Christianity into things, if not quite as notorious.
Anyroa', to rephrase, isn't much of this--

...What I think is that Ka is one of the many beliefs existing in Roland's world, akin to citizens of Lud's belief in demons inside the drums, and as deadly as that. I think when that belief became predominant, it may even have led to the world moving on... although I got to give it more thought. The whole saga for me is about Roland overcoming his false beliefs, fighting the fascination of Ka, and finally learning to exercise his free will, thus eventually becoming free.

--contradicted by the pere's discovery of "the ka of Mid-World"?

I tend to overinsert polytheism into the DT more than I should lol
anyway...
I think that because Roland is the central character and all the stories and worlds somehow intersect with him then they are connected with his mostly predetermined fate

Spoiler:

by the loop

as soon as roland goes somewhere or meets someone then they are immedietly touched by his Ka, in effect wherever roland goes, ka like a wind follows due to his mostly predetermined destiny. A world not touched by roland would in effect not be affected by ka

Spoiler:

because it would not be in the loop

the paradox being that all the DT except DT4's flashback takes place within it, with that exception, any story outside of it is something we as readers cannot see within it. another paradox is the fascinating question of just what he did leading up to the first time he climbed that staircase, because according to my theorizing that first time: his path was not 90% predetermined the way it became from then on

[Jean]

I am notorious for reading Christianity into every line of TDT (at which you have already gracefully hinted before )

Are you calling me tactless?

I am calling you observant!

Perhaps so, but no offense meant. I may also be just as guilty of reading Christianity into things, if not quite as notorious.

No, you are not notorious, you are famous.

Anyroa', to rephrase, isn't much of this--

...What I think is that Ka is one of the many beliefs existing in Roland's world, akin to citizens of Lud's belief in demons inside the drums, and as deadly as that. I think when that belief became predominant, it may even have led to the world moving on... although I got to give it more thought. The whole saga for me is about Roland overcoming his false beliefs, fighting the fascination of Ka, and finally learning to exercise his free will, thus eventually becoming free.

--contradicted by the pere's discovery of "the ka of Mid-World"?

Yes, if we talk about his immediate experience, it is. It doesn't mean, however, that if he was given sufficient amount of leisure - thing absolutely necessary for clear, consistent and free thinking, especially when the matter is as complex as this - he would accept the notion in the form it existed in the school of thought Roland tried (not always consistently) to keep to. What he felt immediately was very much forced by the circumstances he could have never foreseen or thought of beforehand; I think in the end he would have seen that the notion is, as I tried to show at .net (and some day will resume trying here) partly reducible to others, partly just empty of meaning, partly product of ideology fabricated to enable survival, but he was not allowed these free thought, - though the refusal itself was a result of his free choice. He is, and has always been, confused, but at some point he chooses to choose action over reflection; and Ka, at the moment, is a concept that helps him - ad hoc - overcome his confusion and start direct action.

[pathoftheturtle]

Balderdash.

Getting a bit off topic, but I'd just like to clarify that my point about "serving the entire universe" wasn't meant to assert that Christianity should be presented so as to be universally acceptable. Firmly holding hard doctrines is fine and, IMO, admirable. I was talking about still being a Good Samaritan.

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

-- Matthew 7:22-23

Nonetheless, Jean, I still think that you're being overly narrow, in defense of one perspective. When you're ready to show more detail, you might change my mind, (who knows?) but while I'll agree now that the systems of New Canaan had much room for improvement, I still think that they were better than what came just before, and I can't see what is so bad about ideology that enables survival or what is so problematic about ka in specific.

flaggwalkstheline: I don't know. That's complicated. Hard to argue, however. Time-travel, mysticism, religion, destiny, all of the things we're talking about here, often do involve irony of cause. I think that ka is everywhere, but then, it is hard to see how any world could actually be "not touched by" Roland's quest, anyway, since all things are eventually connected. It's stated several times in TDT that ka comes from the Dark Tower, so maybe, just maybe, the Divine Plan works in the DT mythos through Roland in a way like what you describe.

ETA -- To be more clear:

DT7

What I think is more likely is that Roland looping is a result of ka, rather than the other way around.

[Jean]

spam? backsavekk, you have 24 hours to reveal yourself. If you are not a spammer (which you in all likelihood are, though), post something articulate.

Thank you.

[Brice]

Jean, fuck that! He is a spammer. Maul him.

[Jean]

wait, I am seasoning my breakfast... playing bear-and-mouse...

[Brice]

[Letti]

yeah?

Best question of the thread. Hands down.

[blavigne]

yeah?

Best question of the thread. Hands down.

Letti you are too cool

[Storyslinger]

Jean, fuck that! He is a spammer. Maul him.

Do it!

[Jean]

: drumroll :

that's life of a spammer. Here today, gone tomorrow!